Talk:Social media platforms

Archives for this talk page:

<1>

, (new)

Fediverse being on wannabe's

@RockfordRoe - Before you and I end up in an edit war over this (would rather avoid it), could I ask why you chose to put my paragraph about the Fediverse in the Wannabe's section? It has more users than FetLife according to the article itself (which is in the Major sites section) and the Wannabe's section seems mostly to be used for networks that either are failing, have failed or are purely alt-right/reactionary dens, which the Fediverse isn't (in fact, there's quite a thriving LGBTQ+ community that in no small part got larger due to Tumblr and Twitter booting users indiscriminately). The Crow (talk) 15:20, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Jesus how old this article

In the Facebook section — “like livejournal or MySpace Facebook is very popular with college students” etc. Possibly just a joke, but I thought it was funny idk 203.111.4.57 (talk) 19:20, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

WeChat getting its own article

I believe WeChat might merit an article of its own, especially given its role in spreading far-right radicalization to first-generation Chinese immigrants in the U.S. and beyond over the past decade or so, and the implications that's had for attempts to bring back affirmative action in California, LGBT-inclusive education in areas with heavy Chinese immigrant populations, attempts to institute data disaggregation in multiple states, and other anti-Muslim, far-right causes.^{— Unsigned, by: 76.126.165.152 / talk / contribs}

You can add it to the to do list, or if you want start an article at Draft:WeChat. Plutocow (talk) 23:40, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

I like to see resources too so I can review what's going on. Wikipedia doesn't give me much in terms of far-right pipeline for the Chinese-American immigrants. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 00:06, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm busy with work right now, but you would be correct; the rise of WeChat radicalization among Chinese immigrants was so devastatingly effective because far-right Chinese immigrants were propagandizing on this exclusively Mandarin-language sphere whereas mainstream Asian-American civil rights orgs work for pan-Asian spaces; they were thus able to spread their propaganda to other recent Chinese immigrants who mostly operate in Mandarin-language spaces, and dare I say it, profess some belief in Chinese ethnic and cultural exceptionalism or even supremacy. Us Asians left of Hitler were caught flat-footed when we saw Chinese immigrants getting in public en masse and spouting insane fever swamp talking points like how affirmative action would mean that all Chin-AHEM Asian students are banned from college or that data disaggregation is just like the Nuremberg laws, or talking about how Peter Liang deserved to be able to kill unarmed black people and get away with it scot free like white cops do, or coming to Trump rallies wearing "Chinese Americans love Trump" t-shirts and waving banners saying the same, because we didn't know how these people were organizing or how they were disseminating these talking points.

By the time the rest of us realized what was going on, it was too late; the cancer had metastasized, so to speak. --76.126.165.152 (talk) 16:00, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

I was able to quickly Google a couple of references from Foreign Policy (1) and NBC News (2) that indicate heavy Islamaphobia and translated alt-right viewpoints are spread in WeChat's Asian space. Outside US space, it appears that China is spreading Chinese propaganda through WeChat (3), and heavily Chinese nationalist echo chambers exists. (4) WeChat is under complete Chinese control so of course it censors subjects it doesn't like (eg Hong Kong democracy); even people posting in the US are monitored and censored. (5) (6)(7)(8)(9). There seems enough material to support expansion. More or less it sounds like WeChat is kind of like Reddit (meaning it's not all bad, but there are pockets of crap), with a key difference being that an authoritarian thug state is watching all that you do on that platform, and censoring what it doesn't like. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 16:48, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Facebook getting its own article

It seems the section on Facebook is long enough that it could be its own article. Some section about Zuckerberg specifically could also be included, as he's done his fair share of weird/shitty things. This would also allow the wall of text to be broken up a bit and made more user friendly and readable (pictures, pop-out quotes, etc).

Does RationalWiki have a specific policy on splitting pages? Wikipedia has a typically complex bureaucratic procedure to ensure everything is properly attributed, but not sure what would be required here. --Annanoon (talk) 12:47, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! Facebook is now its own page. --Annanoon (talk) 17:05, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Gender extremism & Tumblr

Even people who are generally on board with the 2010s progressive/feminist/social justice memepool tend to find some of these folks to be extremists

Here we run into the problems with the label "extremist". Are nonconventional gender advocates advocating for violent solutions to systemic problems? This seems like a strawman and unnecessary editorializing. Carthage (talk) 16:51, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

I’d just call them “cranks”. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 17:15, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

I'd still object to that label, but I ain't gonna stop you. Carthage (talk) 17:19, 5 October 2023 (UTC)